REPRESENTATION (article 24) - GUATEMALA - C029, C105 - 1996

Report of the Committee set up to examine the representation made by the International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers' Associations (IUF) and Public Services International (PSI) under article 24 of the ILO Constitution alleging non-observance by Guatemala of the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), and the Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105)

Decision

1. The Governing Body adopted the report of the tripartite committee. Procedure closed.

Complaint Procedure

1. A. Introduction
2. 1. By a communication dated 18 January 1994, and repeated on 24 January 1994, the International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers' Associations (IUF), referring to article 24 of the Constitution of the ILO, made a representation alleging non-observance by the Government of Guatemala of the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), and the Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105). By a communication of 17 February 1994, Public Services International (PSI), on behalf of two affiliated organizations, namely the Sindicato de Trabajadores del Instituto Nacional de Electrificación (STINDE) and the Federación Nacional de Sindicatos de Trabajadores del Estado (FENASTEG), associated itself with the representation brought by the IUF.
3. 2. The above Conventions were ratified by Guatemala on 13 June 1989 and 9 December 1959 respectively and are both in force in that country.
4. 3. The relevant provisions of the Constitution of the International Labour Organization relating to the submission of representations are the following:
5. Article 24
6. In the event of any representation being made to the International Labour Office by an industrial association of employers or of workers that any of the Members has failed to secure in any respect the effective observance within its jurisdiction of any Convention to which it is a party, the Governing Body may communicate this representation to the government against which it is made, and may invite that government to make such statement on the subject as it may think fit.
7. Article 25
8. If no statement is received within a reasonable time from the government in question, or if the statement when received is not deemed to be satisfactory by the Governing Body, the latter shall have the right to publish the representation and the statement, if any, made in reply to it.
9. 4. The procedure for the examination of representations is governed by the Standing Orders, as revised by the Governing Body at its 212th Session (March 1980).
10. 5. In accordance with article 2, paragraph 1, of the Standing Orders, the Director-General brought the representation before the Officers of the Governing Body.
11. 6. At its 259th Session (March 1994), the Governing Body, on the basis of the report submitted by its Officers, decided that the representation was receivable and set up a committee composed of Mr. Rosales Arguello (Government member), Mr. Durling (Employer member) and Mr. Trotman (Worker member) for the examination thereof. At its ... Session, the Governing Body appointed Mr. A. Ducreux (Government member) to replace Mr. Rosales Arguello.
12. 7. In accordance with the provisions of article 4, paragraph 1(a) and (c), of the Standing Orders, the Committee invited the Government to submit the information that it considered appropriate concerning the representation.
13. 8. The Government requested the tripartite committee set up to examine the representation to extend the date fixed initially at 31 October 1994 for the submission of its observations, which was extended until 15 January 1995. Nevertheless, the Government submitted its observations in a communication dated 16 March 1995.
14. 9. The Committee also examined the reports of the Independent Expert of the United Nations on the situation of human rights in Guatemala with regard to the matters raised by the organization that made the representation and the comments of the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations of the ILO relating to the Conventions on forced labour ratified by Guatemala.
15. B. Examination of the representation
16. 1. Allegations made by the IUF
17. 10. The IUF alleges non-observance by the Government of Guatemala of the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), and the Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105), as a result of the obligation imposed by the Guatemalan army on male rural workers between 18 and 50 years of age to serve in military or development work in the so-called Civil Self-defence Patrols (PACs). The IUF alleges that participation in these patrols is not voluntary within the meaning of Convention No. 29 and is not covered by any of the exceptions envisaged by the Convention. Furthermore, service in civil patrols is in contradiction with the provisions of Convention No. 105, since it is used as a means of political coercion, economic development and racial discrimination.
18. 11. According to the IUF, the civil patrols were established by a military Government with two strategic functions: first, in view of the fact that they were established in a context of war and rebellion, they were intended to supplement the numbers of military personnel with a large number of civilians; secondly, the patrols served as a means of physically and psychologically controlling indigenous rural inhabitants, whom the Government feared might sympathize with the guerillas.
19. 12. The IUF alleges that, despite the fact that the Government has always maintained that the patrols were established in response to the manifest desire of the rural inhabitants to protect their villages against attacks by guerillas and that participation in the patrols is voluntary, they are a system of repression in which all male rural inhabitants between 18 and 50 years of age are obliged to provide their services in day and night shifts which vary according to the size of the population and its manpower resources. The services that are imposed are mainly of a military or other nature, such as the maintenance of roads or supplying the army. With regard to the military services performed, the IUF also states that the patrols are sometimes used as shock troops in anti-guerilla operations, as a result of which they are sometimes involved in clashes for which they are not prepared, since they only have their own tools (sticks and machetes) and are used as "cannon fodder". However, whether or not the services undertaken by the patrols are of a military nature, they are imposed, planned and supervised by the army.
20. 13. According to the IUF, since their establishment in 1982, hundreds of thousands of males have been enrolled in the patrols by order of the army. In some cases, women and children have also been forced to provide certain services in the patrols.
21. 14. The IUF refers in its allegations to reprisals against persons who refuse to provide the services that are imposed. According to the IUF, to refuse to serve on patrols is to risk being labelled "subversive", which can have grave consequences for the life or physical integrity of the persons concerned. The complainant organization also refers in its allegations to various cases of corporal punishment inflicted on rural residents who had not fulfilled the obligation to patrol; in one case, a person was tied to a tree and beaten with sticks and machetes by the other members of the patrol by order of the army. The allegations also include cases in which members of the patrols were obliged to kill who had refused to fulfil the service imposed upon them.
22. 15. The IUF alleges that the length of the service imposed upon them prevents rural workers from carrying out the work that is necessary to ensure the subsistence of their families, which makes it necessary for them on many occasions to send their minor sons as replacements in order to avoid reprisals. Reprisals are also carried out against the leaders of human rights organizations which assist rural inhabitants who wish to withdraw from the patrols, and such is the case of the "Runuzel Jumam" Ethnic Communities Council (CERJ), whose leaders have been accused of being communists and guerillas.
23. 16. The IUF also alleges that the system of patrols is of a racist nature and that the obligation to serve in patrols is imposed almost exclusively upon the indigenous population.
24. 17. The IUF alleges that the transition to a civilian government has not changed the above situation and that, despite the fact that the Constitution of Guatemala explicitly provides that no one may be forced to be associated with or a member of self-defence groups or associations such as the patrols, involuntary unpaid persons continue to be recruited to serve in them. The IUF adds that the Government's position is contradictory because, on the one hand, local communities have been informed that they have the right to abolish the patrols, while on the other hand, representatives of the Government have continued to maintain that the patrols are necessary to combat the illegal insurgency and that they fulfil an important function during the continuation of armed conflict.
25. 18. The IUF alleges that the fact of exacting service in patrols under the above conditions falls within the scope of Conventions Nos. 29 and 105. This practice violates the obligation set out in Article 1, paragraph 1, of Convention No. 29 to the effect that "each Member of the International Labour Organization which ratifies this Convention undertakes to suppress the use of forced or compulsory labour in all its forms within the shortest possible period". The practice falls within the definition of forced labour for the purposes of the Convention, according to which "forced or compulsory labour shall mean all work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily". According to the IUF, the service exacted in patrols does not fall within any of the exceptions envisaged by the Convention, since: it is not a service exacted in virtue of the compulsory military service laws of Guatemala (Article 2(2)(a)); it does not form part of normal civic obligations (Article 2(2)(b)); it is not a service exacted as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law (Article 2(2)(c)); nor is it a case of emergency since, despite the existence of armed groups in the country, it does not fulfil the conditions of a sudden and unforeseen event which requires immediate measures to respond to it; and finally, the services exacted do not correspond to the exception made for "minor communal services" in the interest of the community, since the service is exacted by the army for the benefit of the army and the rural residents are not consulted concerning the need for the patrols; the service is imposed upon them. The IUF alleges that this practice is also in violation of Article 1(b) and (e) of Convention No. 105, which prohibits the use of forced labour for purposes of economic development or as a means of racial discrimination.
26. 2. The Government's observations
27. 19. In its reply to the allegations made by the IUF, the Government states that the difficult situation experienced by the country as a consequence of the internal armed conflict gave rise to the need for the Government, with a view to safeguarding the social well-being, peace and tranquillity of the citizens, to create Civil Self-defence Patrols (PACs). Subsequently in 1986, by means of Legislative Decree No. 19-86 and in accordance with the powers conferred by article 34 of the political Constitution of the Republic, Voluntary Civil Defence Committees were established, composed voluntarily of Guatemalan citizens in their own organizations to ensure the defence of their communities, families and property against the consequences of natural disasters, public crises and armed conflicts. The above Committees were also established to defend the citizens against the new method of attack implemented by insurgent groups, which demolished complete villages and carried off their inhabitants. Article 34 of the Constitution recognizes the right to freedom of association and, in this sense, the Government states that the activities of the Voluntary Civil Defence Committees cannot be considered to be forced labour, since they are intended to benefit their communities and they are composed of members who join on a purely voluntary basis and are the expression of the right to freedom of association set out in article 34 of the National Constitution.
28. 20. With regard to the allegations of the IUF that service in the Voluntary Civil Defence Committees is not voluntary and is exacted under threat of a penalty, the Government states that the membership of Voluntary Civil Defence Committees is totally free and their members have never been obliged to belong to them under the threat of any penalty whatsoever, that the policy of the current Government is to respect human rights and that its intention is for adherence and membership of these groups to continue being completely free.
29. 21. The Government also refers to point 5 of the Comprehensive Agreement on Human Rights in Guatemala concluded between the Government and the National Guatemalan Revolutionary Union entitled "Guarantees for the freedoms of association and movement", which provides that "both parties agree that the freedoms of association, movement and circulation are international human rights that are constitutionally recognized and must be exercised in accordance with the law and be fully applicable in Guatemala".
30. 22. The Government also states that, in order to avoid a repetition of a number of cases that were reported in the past concerning the use of pressure on persons to become members of the Voluntary Civil Defence Committees, the above Agreement establishes a mechanism through which the Human Rights Procurator immediately carries out the necessary investigations of denunciations respecting forced membership of Voluntary Civil Defence Committees. The Procurator must also issue public information on the need for the formation of above committees to be voluntary and to respect the law and human rights. He also consults the populations and ensures that the members of the Committees express themselves freely and without any pressure. The Agreement also provides that, in the event of any violation of their voluntary nature being reported, the Procurator shall adopt the measures that he considers appropriate and instigate the appropriate judicial or administrative action to penalize violations. The Government also refers to the statement contained in the Agreement to the effect that the Government will not promote the organization or form new Voluntary Civil Defence Committees anywhere on the national territory provided that there are no grounds for doing so. The persons affected in the neighbourhood have to request the municipal mayor to convoke a public meeting with the participation of the Human Rights Procurator, who ascertains by all the means at his disposal both the voluntary nature and the decision of the people.
31. 23. The Government also states that the United Nations Mission for Verification of Human Rights and of Compliance with the Commitments of the Comprehensive Agreement on Human Rights in Guatemala (MINUGUA), which has been on the national territory since 21 November 1994, is responsible for observing, among other matters, observance of the above Agreement.
32. 24. The Government concludes by stating that, although participation in Voluntary Civil Defence Committees is not compulsory, there are mechanisms that guarantee the voluntary nature of membership and solutions are envisaged for any irregularity.
33. 25. The Government also refers to some of the statistical data in the study entitled "Civil Defence Committees in Guatemala", which was undertaken under the auspices of the agreement concluded between the Spanish International Cooperation Agency and the Human Rights Procurator in Guatemala in which, with reference to the voluntary nature of participation in the patrols, it was pointed out that
34. 73 per cent of the members of the patrols responded that military commissioners and army officers informed them of the establishment of the Voluntary Civil Defence Committees and 64 per cent replied that soldiers had told them to become members of the patrols, while 13 per cent admitted that they had decided to do so themselves; 67 per cent state that they joined for reasons of security, while 17 per cent maintained that they had felt under pressure. Sixty-nine per cent stated that they liked being in the patrols because they were responsible for ensuring the security of their families and 25 per cent admitted that they did not like being in the patrols due to the economic costs and personal risks.
35. The Government states that such data lead to the conclusion that the activities undertaken by the Voluntary Civil Defence Committees cannot be considered to be forced labour, since their members joined them on a completely voluntary basis and their activities are designed to benefit their communities.
36. 26. With regard to the allegation concerning the use of forced labour as a means of political coercion or education of the indigenous population, the Government states that, according to the above study, these groups fulfil their function of preventive security for the communities and, moreover, many of them are being freely converted into Peace and Development Committees, which have the fundamental objective of the economic and social development of the areas in which they are located. The Government adds that this transformation proves that there is no government policy to use these groups as means of political coercion or education.
37. 27. With regard to the allegation that the Voluntary Civil Defence Committees make it possible to allow the use of forced labour as a means of racial discrimination, the Government states that it was in the rural areas of Guatemala that the inhabitants, who are in their majority indigenous, felt the need to organize themselves into such groups and it is for this reason that they are composed mainly of indigenous persons. With reference to the allegation that the Voluntary Civil Defence Committees allow the use of forced labour for the purposes of economic development, it states that the activities of these groups are to the benefit of their community and that they have never been considered as a means of economic development.
38. 3. The Committee's conclusions
39. 28. The Committee notes that, according to the allegations submitted by the IUF and the information supplied by the Government, there have existed in the country since the beginnings of the 1980s civil defence committees, which were originally called Civil Self-defence Patrols (PACs), a name that continues to be in use; Voluntary Civil Defence Committees, under Legislative Decree No. 19-86; and, finally, Peace and Development Committees.
40. 29. The Committee notes that the allegations of the IUF concerning the compulsory nature of participation in the Committees, the imposition of penalties in the case of refusal to fulfil such service and the use of this work for the purposes of development and as a means of racial discrimination, are refuted by the Government in the written communication containing its response to the allegations, according to which membership of these Committees is totally free and for the purposes of the defence of the communities, combined with activities for their benefit.
41. 30. The Committee notes in extenso the report "Civil Defence Committees in Guatemala" quoted in the Government's observations (see paragraph 25) and notes that, in the introduction to the above study, the Human Rights Procurator of Guatemala states that this
42. type of study arises from the polemic concerning the existence of Civil Defence Committees, their impact on the breakdown of local socio-economic structures, the use of force and the control that they have exercised over the civilian population. Without any doubt, the most important terms in this case are related to voluntary membership and the right of association, which are both indissolubly linked. It should be noted that these committees, although they were conceived in the context of the counter-insurgency struggle, have in many cases undertaken their own activities, thereby causing serious violations of the human rights of rural populations.
43. The Procurator also states that "many of the denunciations received in this institution (the Office of the Procurator) have concerned persons forced to enlist as civil defence 'volunteers' with the aggravating circumstance that if they disobey they are subjected to threats and accused of being subversive". In his annual report submitted to Congress in January 1994, the Procurator stated that he had "dealt with many cases of the forced membership of patrols and many denunciations of arbitrary actions by these organizations".
44. 31. The Government indicated in its statement that membership of the above Civil Defence Committees could not be considered to be forced labour, since it was the expression of the constitutional right to freedom of association (article 34).
45. 32. In this respect, the Committee also notes the statement by the Human Rights Procurator of Guatemala in the introduction to the above study, according to which --
46. article 34 of the current Constitution, under which "the right to freedom of association is recognized. No-one is obliged to be associated with, nor to become a member of self-defence or similar groups or associations", sets out the traditional right to association, which is vital in any democratic system. The wording respecting the right not to be obliged to be associated responds to the concern of citizens to prevent the obligation that had been placed on the inhabitants of certain regions of the country to be members of Civil Patrols. In this respect, it also has to be taken into account that the freedom or right of association set out in the Constitution refers solely and exclusively to associations of a civil nature ... but not to organizations of a military nature, that is armed organizations, since the use of arms is the exclusive prerogative of the army of Guatemala and the national police force, which are institutions that are duly governed by their respective laws. As a consequence, the Voluntary Civil Defence Committees cannot set aside the right of association, because in so doing they would be misrepresenting their status and legal nature. If the functioning of these groups is explained under the terms of Legislative Decree No. 19-86, such an explanation would lack substance since the above Decree is contrary to the Constitution and legally null and void.
47. 33. The Committee notes the conclusions contained in the above report on Civil Defence Committees, according to which:
48. -- Civil self-defence patrols are not organized in a voluntary manner, but under pressure; this is not clearly stated by those heard in inquiries for fear of possible subsequent reprisals. There are also persons who like doing this type of work.
49. -- There is a form of control over the members of the patrols, who are issued with an identification card by the military commissioners, and when a person fails to obey or commits a fault he is reported and, depending on the gravity of the fault, is subjected to various punishments.
50. -- The initial organization of the patrols was and is still the responsibility of the civilian affairs branch of the army, and of military commissioners, who gather together the population and make them see the need to organize. However, anyone who does not wish to do so faces the consequences and is accused of being a guerilla or a collaborator with the guerillas.
51. -- Other consequences of the patrols, apart from economic losses, consist of injuries and accidents through the carelessness of the members of the patrols in handling weapons, as a result of a lack of training in their use.
52. 34. The Committee notes the introductory paragraphs of the Agreement of 16 February 1994, in which the Human Rights Procurator of Guatemala calls for the repeal of Legislative Decree No. 19-86, in the following terms:
53. "Considering that there have been a large number of cases of compulsion placed upon the population to provide this type of service, by means of coercion and threats that violate the freedom of action and movement of the inhabitants of rural areas, and in some cases even limit their economic and occupational activities", agrees to "recommend to the Congress of the Republic that Legislative Decree No. 19-86 recognizing the existence of civil defence committees be repealed".
54. 35. The Committee notes the most recent reports of the Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Guatemala, submitted to the Human Rights Commission of the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations; E/CN.4/94/10, paragraph 20, according to which: "there have been many reports of the use of coercion to force peasants to join the PACs in open violation of article 34 of the Constitution which embodies the freedom of association ...; the members of PACs have to patrol on two days a week, when they cannot perform their usual work; and if they are unable to patrol for any reason they must make a payment in respect of the unworked shift". "Verification of the voluntary nature of membership of the PACs must be entrusted to the Human Rights Procurator, who should establish permanent machinery for periodic verification." "On the question of the civilian self-defence patrols (PACs), the Expert agrees" with the recommendation "that they should be disbanded" (E/CN.4/94/10, paragraphs 95, 96 and 162). In the 1995 and 1996 reports of the Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Guatemala, the above was reiterated (E/CN.4/95/15, paragraph 17 et seq., and E/CN.4/96/15, paragraph 122).
55. 36. The Committee notes the convergence between the allegations made by the IUF, the information contained in the reports of the Independent Expert of the United Nations on the situation of human rights in Guatemala and the statements made by the Human Rights Procurator of Guatemala concerning the existence in Guatemala of compulsory service exacted from hundreds of thousands of persons in Civil Defence Committees (known as Civil Self-defence Patrols (PACs) or Voluntary Civil Defence Committees (CVDCs)) under the menace of a penalty.
56. 37. The Committee notes the conditions and consequences of the provision of this service or its refusal in terms of economic losses, risks and harm to physical and moral integrity and reprisals, which may even include death, imposed upon those who either occasionally fail to provide the service or refuse to carry it out.
57. 38. The Committee notes that the exaction of a service under the menace of a penalty is a crime within the scope of application of Convention No. 29, ratified by Guatemala, since according to Article 2.1 the term "forced or compulsory labour" for the purposes of the Convention means "all work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily".
58. 39. The Committee notes that the Government's statement does not contain any indication that might support the belief that the obligation to provide compulsory service in Civil Defence Committees corresponds to any of the exceptions set out in Article 2, paragraph 2, of the Convention.
59. 40. The Government indicates in its statement that the almost exclusively indigenous composition of Civil Defence Committees is explained by the principally indigenous composition of the population in the rural areas of the country.
60. 41. The Committee notes that, although this situation is another expression of the vulnerability of the indigenous majority in the country, the above does not prevent it being considered a violation of Convention No. 105, under the terms of which each Member which ratifies the Convention undertakes to suppress and not to make use of forced labour as a means of racial discrimination. The Committee notes paragraph 95 of the report of the Independent Expert of the United Nations on the situation of human rights in Guatemala concerning vulnerable groups, in which she states that "although it may appear paradoxical, the (indigenous) majority in Guatemala is a vulnerable group".
61. 42. The IUF alleges that service in the Committees is used as a means of political coercion and education of the indigenous population. In this respect, the Government states that the function of the Committees is preventive security and in no case political education. The Committee notes that, according to the information supplied by the IUF, the Study on the above Committees and the reports of the Independent Expert of the United Nations and of the Government, the activities of the Committees are intended to combat the insurgency. In this context, the persons obliged to serve in the Committees are also obliged to support a particular political opinion, which is in violation of Convention No. 105.
62. 43. The IUF also alleges that the activities of the Committees are used as a means of economic development and the Government states in this respect that the activities undertaken are for the benefit for the community which provides the above service. The Committee observes that:
63. (a) even if the activities were undertaken for the benefit of the community whose members are forced to provide the services, this would not remove them from the scope of Article 1(b) of the Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) which prohibits the use of any form of forced or compulsory labour as a means of mobilizing and using labour for purposes of economic development;
64. (b) again, as regards the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), even if the activities were undertaken for the benefit of the community, only one of the conditions listed in Article 2(2)(e) would be met; to remove the activities from the scope of the Convention, there should be, in addition, full consultation of the members of the community or their representatives as to the need for these activities, and they would have to be minor services, involving not more than a few days of work per year; in this connection, the Committee refers to the explanations provided by the CEACR in paragraph 37 of its 1979 General Survey on the Aboliton of Forced Labour;
65. (c) this being noted the Committee nevertheless observes that much of the information available on the activities of the Civil Defence Committees in Guatemala relates to activities of a military or closely related nature, such as the maintenance of roads to improve the mobility of the army or work related to the maintenance of military equipment or the provision of services to the army. The Committee does not have sufficient information at its disposal to consider the use of such activities as means of economic development.
66. 44. The Committee notes, according to the indications contained in the reports of the Independent Expert of the United Nations and in the reports of the Human Rights Procurator of Guatemala, that persons accused of having exacted forced labour have benefited from impunity in cases where the Attorney General of the Republic of Guatemala has issued a decision concerning their responsibility and that the appropriate judicial action has not been taken against them. By virtue of Article 25 of Convention No. 29, "the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour shall be punishable as a penal offence, and it shall be an obligation on any Member ratifying this Convention to ensure that the penalties imposed by law are really adequate and are strictly enforced".
67. 45. The Committee notes that the Human Rights Procurator of Guatemala has requested the Congress to repeal Legislative Decree No. 19-86 recognizing the existence of civil defence committees, within the context of which the exaction of a service in violation of Conventions Nos. 29 and 105 is facilitated.
68. 4. The Committee's recommendations
69. 46. The Committee recommends the Governing Body:
70. (a) to approve the present report, and in particular the conclusions contained in paragraphs 28-45 on compulsory labour exacted under the menace of a penalty from hundreds of thousands of persons under the guise of service in the so-called Civil Self-defence Patrols (PACs) or the Voluntary Civil Defence Committees (CVDC); on the use of compulsory labour as a means of racial discrimination and the failure to impose penalties in cases in which the exaction of forced labour has been brought to the knowledge of the competent authorities, all of which is in violation of the provisions of the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), and the Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105), which have been ratified by Guatemala;
71. (b) taking into account the conclusions contained in paragraphs 28-45, to urge the Government of Guatemala:
72. (i) to take the necessary measures to ensure that effect is given in practice to the formal prohibition contained in article 34 of the Constitution of the Republic, under the terms of which "no one shall be obliged to associate with or to be a member of self-defence or similar groups or associations";
73. (ii) to consider the repeal of the legal texts that recognize the existence of Civil Defence Committees, through which the exaction of forced labour is facilitated, and in particular Legislative Decree No. 19-86, the repeal of which has been recommended by the Human Rights Procurator of the Republic of Guatemala in the Agreement dated 16 February 1994;
74. (iii) to ensure the rapidity of the judicial processes and inquiries undertaken concerning the exaction of compulsory labour and to guarantee the imposition of penalties and their strict enforcement;
75. (c) in the reports submitted by the Government under article 22 of the Constitution on the application of Conventions Nos. 29 and 105, to supply information on the measures that have been adopted to give effect to the recommendations contained in the above paragraphs so that the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations can examine the action taken on these matters;
76. (d) to declare closed the present procedure before the Governing Body resulting from the representation made by the International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers' Associations (IUF) and Public Services International (PSI) alleging non-observance by Guatemala of the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), and the Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105).